There came a man who was sent from God; his name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all men might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.

Then Nathanael declared, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel.” (John 1:6-8, 32-34, 44-49)

John was sent from God “as a witness to testify.” Here is another great theme of the Gospel, and it consists of the two ideas of witness and testimony. The witness refers to the person, and the testimony refers to what the person does as a witness. The two ideas are inseparable, and they explain each other. We are interested in what the Gospel means for a person to be God’s witness, or one who testifies about the things of God.

The Gospel shows us that a testimony is mainly a verbal statement. Verse 15 reads, “John testifies concerning him….saying.” Then, verses 19 and 32 say that he offers his testimony, and this is followed by a record of his verbal statements. Later in 18:37, Jesus tells Pilate, “In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me.” He came to testify to the truth, and the nature of his testimony is such that a person would listen to it. His testimony is a verbal statement.

We must add something else to this idea of a witness. John 3:11 says, “I tell you the truth, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen.” John 3:31-32 gives us something similar: “The one who comes from heaven is above all. He testifies to what he has seen and heard.” A testimony is a verbal statement about what “we know.” In other words, a witness is someone who talks about someone or something, and he is supposed to know what he is talking about. He is supposed to be familiar about the truth of the matter.

A testimony is a verbal statement of one’s knowledge about someone or something. This knowledge comes from what a person “has seen and heard.” We must discuss what this means, since it does not refer to empirical sensations at all. Anyone with theological aptitude should immediately detect this – the truth is staring you in the face in John 3:31-32 – but we will take some time for it to make sure. In any case, we must first complete this part of the discussion by considering whether there is such a thing as a non-verbal witness or testimony.

There is a sense in which something non-verbal can function as a testimony. However, something like an item, an event, or an action can be a testimony only as a symbolic gesture that represents a verbal statement.

For example, when a nation lands on the moon, its representatives (the astronauts) plant a flag on the ground. The flag serves as a witness and offers a testimony. But in itself the flag means nothing and says nothing. Rather, it is only a symbol or a sign that represents a testimony the content of which can only be expressed in an abundance of words. In this case, the testimony might include the ideas, “We were here,” or “We have achieved this level of technological development,” or “This is proof of our determination and intelligence.” The flag might represent all of these ideas. In fact, notice that as long as its meaning is not defined by words, it remains ambiguous. One might just as easily interpret it to mean, “This is proof of humanity’s vainglory, for we would devote millions of dollars to shoot ourselves out into space when we cannot even take care of the problems on earth.”

Likewise, a flag on Mount Everest might mean, “This is proof of our resolve, stamina, and achievement.” But I might interpret it to mean, “This is proof of your futile life and selfish attitude, since you were willing to risk your own life and part with your loved ones just to show that you can do something so foolish and useless.” What does the flag mean? No one can tell unless it is explained by a verbal statement either before or after the fact.

A non-verbal witness “speaks” only in a symbolic manner that awaits verbal interpretation, so even a non-verbal witness presupposes a verbal testimony. This is how we are to understand biblical passages that refer to non-verbal witnesses such as the works of Christ. For example, Jesus says that the “work” that the Father has given him to perform “testifies” that the Father has sent him (John 5:36). But this testimony makes sense only because an entire theology, verbally expounded, is presupposed. That is, the ideas of “Father” and “sent,” and the principle that his “work” authenticates his commission, are not conveyed by the actions themselves.

Elsewhere, Jesus says, “Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe on the evidence of the miracles themselves” (14:11). Again, to believe because of the miracles presupposes the verbal assertions and explanations; otherwise, one would not know what to believe because of the miracles. When Jesus says to believe because of the miracles, he means to believe what the people might refuse to believe without the miracles. That is, verbal assertions and explanations have been made prior to and apart from the miracles. To paraphrase, Jesus is saying, “Believe me when I say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me; or at least believe that I am in the Father and the Father is in me on the evidence of the miracles themselves.” Or, “If you do not believe my words just because I spoke them, then believe my words because I perform miracles.” This is why the Gospel often calls his miracles “signs,” since they are historical events that symbolize and authenticate the verbal testimonies about Jesus Christ.

An essential characteristic of biblical testimony is that it is never truly based on human sensation or observation, even when the testimony comes from so-called “eyewitnesses.” Almost any instance in the Bible of anyone testifying to anything about God will serve as an example, and a person who reads through the Gospel of John will encounter many of these. For now we will limit ourselves to illustrations drawn from the present context.

In 1:15, John the Baptist testifies, “He who comes after me has surpassed me because he was before me.” Whether he refers to a metaphysical or chronological priority, since the Christ would be an incarnation of deity, or to a superiority of rank or status, since the Christ would be greater than any prophet, the “before” in “he was before me” cannot come from any empirical sensation or inference from observation, for the simple reason that this “before” was not anything that could be physically seen, heard, or observed. In fact, based on verses 31 and 33, at this point John the Baptist might not even know the human identity of the Christ. It was certainly impossible for him to have drawn the inference that the Christ was metaphysically prior or spiritually superior based on empirical observation.

Then, in 1:29, John sees Jesus and says, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!” First, it was impossible for anyone to know that Jesus was the Christ just by looking at him. Otherwise, Jesus would have exhibited essential differences from the rest of humanity even in his appearance, which would be contrary to the testimony of Scripture. In addition, if it could be known that Jesus was the Christ just by looking at him, then John the Baptist would not have needed to say anything. In fact, a major part of his ministry would have been unnecessary. Second, it was also impossible for anyone to know that Jesus was “the Lamb of God” and that he came to take away the sin of the world” by seeing, hearing, or observing him. These statements are rich with theological content that had no necessary relation to the physical appearance of Jesus. Verse 31 states the reason for John the Baptist’s ministry. This was part of his testimony, and it was also something that could not be inferred from sensation or observation.

Again, 1:32 states that John gave a testimony, and he said, “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him.” Did other people see the dove? If not, then what John saw was not physical, not public, and not perceived by physical sight. But if other people also saw the dove, did they know that they were looking at the Spirit, or just a dove like any other dove? If they did not know that they were looking at the Spirit, then John the Baptist perceived something additional, or rather the true nature of the matter beyond the appearance of the dove, and again the knowledge was not derived from physical sight or sensation. And if all could see the dove, and all knew that they were looking at the Spirit, then this just means that all perceived something deeper than the appearance of the dove, since all other doves were only doves. True knowledge of the situation, then, was not only beyond the appearance or what was perceived by the physical senses, but it was other than what was perceived by the physical senses.

Verse 33 tells us the basis of John’s knowledge and testimony: “I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me…told me.” That is, John the Baptist testified on the basis of revelation. He did not testify on the basis of anything that he had seen and heard in the physical sense, but on what he had seen and heard in the spiritual sense.

When we return to 3:31-32, cited earlier, this principle is even more clear: “The one who comes from heaven is above all. He testifies to what he has seen and heard.” Jesus came from heaven and testified about God and the things of God, or what he had “seen and heard.” But in this same Gospel Jesus states that “God is spirit” (4:24). He is not a physical object that can be perceived by the physical senses. Also, Jesus indeed came from heaven and took up a human body, but before this he did not have this physical body, and thus he did not have physical sense organs by which to perceive anything in the physical or empirical sense. Thus when the Gospel says that he testified of what he had “seen and heard” in heaven, it cannot be referring to physical or empirical perception, but only spiritual or intellectual perception.

This is true in every instance where the Bible states that a person provides a true testimony about God or spiritual things. It is never a reference to something that is based on the physical or empirical, even when seeing and hearing are mentioned. Rather, in every case, the person obtained or applied a spiritual insight or perception based on revelation. This sometimes occurs in conjunction with or on the occasion of a physical sensation, but the knowledge that is claimed and expressed in the testimony is never derived from or dependent on sensation.

This principle is essential to the foundation of the Christian faith. It was the operating principle by which all the prophets testified about God and the Christ who was to come. They testified according to knowledge, but the basis of this knowledge was revelation, and never sensation or inference from sensation. And when the Christ had come, this was the operating principle by which all the disciples recognized Jesus for who he was, even God in the flesh. This is evident in our text. Jesus called Nathanael “a true Israelite, in whom there is nothing false.” God was already at work in him. And when Jesus demonstrated supernatural insight, Nathanael responded, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel.”

The passage forbids us to think that he reacted this way due to a gullible personality or a lack of intelligence, since only a few verses earlier, Nathanael was in a skeptical state of mind, asking with a tone of sarcasm, “Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?” Rather, the heart of this “true Israelite” perceived Jesus for who he was upon meeting him. But his perception was not based on an empirical evaluation, nor was it inferred from what he saw, since at first Jesus did not demonstrate any power that was vastly superior to the prophets of old, yet the prophets were not perceived to be Messiahs. Jesus himself noted to him that afterward he would indeed see “heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.”

That is, the things that Nathanael was going to witness would catch up to his spiritual perception of Jesus, and not that his perception of Jesus would grow by greater and greater demonstrations of power and glory until he reached the conclusion that he was the Son of God. Indeed, if spiritual insight is limited to empirical sensation and inferences from it, then even if sensation is reliable (which the Bible denies), it would take nothing less than a show of omnipotence, perhaps the creation of a new universe, to demonstrate that Jesus was deity, the Son of God. However, even creation does not require omnipotence, but only great power. In any case, knowledge is available through more ready and reliable means, that is, by revelation.

The Gospel is careful to assert and reinforce this principle again and again, because it is also essential to the perpetuation of the Christian faith. As Jesus says near the conclusion of the Gospel, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.” Faith is intelligent assent to revelation, and any kind of faith must transcend sensation. The kind of faith that rests on the testimony of revelation apart from sensation altogether is not only the same, but it is superior, and more blessed.

If God’s witness is one who has spiritual perception and who perceives revelation for what it is, as the truth of God, then he has knowledge of God and the things of God whether or not this knowledge is associated with any physical sensation or empirical verification. And he is able to provide a reliable testimony about God and the things of God when he speaks on the basis of his knowledge, based on and derived from divine revelation. That is, if knowledge refers to the mind’s grasp of revelation, then even those who have not been with Christ in the flesh can be true witnesses for him – as the prophets who lived before his incarnation, and as we who have believed after his ascension.

The first disciples indeed saw Jesus with their physical sight, but they did not perceive who he was because of their physical sight. Rather, they were granted spiritual perception as to who he was, that he was God, man, and the Christ. As I contemplate the testimony of revelation about him, perhaps on the occasion of perusing the pages of Scripture, the Spirit grants me the same perception of the truth, that Jesus was the Christ, that he was God incarnate, that he died for my sins, and that he was raised for my justification. The Spirit enables my mind to perceive the living Christ now on the basis of revelation, so that I have a firsthand perception of him and a firsthand relationship with him. I truly know him, and I can testify about him with knowledge and conviction.

Is this true of you? Do you have the spiritual perception that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God? Do you have the intellectual understanding that to believe in him is life eternal? And is divine revelation the basis of this perception or this understanding? Has the Spirit enabled your mind to grasp and affirm these things apart from sensation? If so, then you have true knowledge about the Lord Jesus, and you are a legitimate witness for him. You can invite people to “come and see,” not in the physical or empirical sense, but to examine the testimony of revelation, so that the Spirit might grant them belief and insight into the truth about Jesus Christ. You have true knowledge about the Lord Jesus. You can provide reliable testimony that he is God, that he came to the earth in the flesh, that he died for the sins of those who would believe, and that anyone who believes in him has eternal life – he will inherit everlasting joy and glory, and a place at the Master’s table.